SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Microcap & Penny Stocks : BNEZ Facts Thread: Ben Ezra, Weinstein and Company, Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Ellen who wrote (37)12/16/1998 5:34:00 PM
From: Ellen  Respond to of 86
 
FAHN - part 3

12/15/98: 10/01/96 PENDING SEC ACTION

THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION FILED A COMPLAINT AGIANST FIRM ALLEGING

THAT FIRM AND A CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL FAILED TO SUPERVISE A REGISTERED

REPRESENTATIVE FORMERLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE JENKINTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA BRANCH OF

A CERTAIN COMPANY WHICH IS A DIVISION OF FAHNESTOCK & CO. SPECIFICALLY, THE

ORDER ALLEGES THAT FIRM AND A CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL, FAILED REASONABLY TO

SUPERVISE A CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL IN CONNECTION WITH HIS MISAPPROPRIATION OF

5

$262,000 FROM THE BROKERAGE ACCOUNTS OF TWO OF THE COMPANIES' CUSTOMERS. [FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION SEE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA V. WENDELL JEFFREY LEE,

DOCKET NOS. 1319-95 AND 1478-95, COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, MONTGOMERY COUNTY,

PENNSYLVANIA; SEC V. WENDELL JEFFREY LEE, 2:95-CV-6088; SEE ALSO EXCHANGE ACT

RELEASE NO. 14659, SEPT. 28, 1995]

12/15/98: 9/17/96 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): ACCOUNT RELATED - FAILURE

TO SUPERVISE; EXECUTIONS-EXECUTION PRICE; ACCOUNT RELATED-NEGLIGENCE;

CHURNING. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$41,500.00; INTEREST, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; ATTORNEY'S

FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN

FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 95-05384]

12/15/98: 4/17/96 PENDING NASD COMPLAINT

THE NASD FILED A COMPALINT AGAINST FAHNESTOCK & CO., INC. ALLEGING VIOLATONS

OF SOES RULE c)2(E) AND ARTICLE III, SECTION 1 OF THE ASSOCIATION'S RULES OF

FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT THE FIRM ENTERED ORDERS ON AN AGENCY BASIS INTO SOES FOR

SECURITIES FOR WHICH THE FIRM WAS A REGISTERED MARKET MAKER. THIS COMPLAINT

WAS AMENDED ON 10/24/96 ALLEGING THAT THE FIRM VIOLATED MARKET PLACE RULE 4730

(B)(5) OF THE RULES OF FAIR PRACITICE FOR THE THE SMALL ORDER EXECUTION

SYSTEM. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS950117]

12/15/98: 4/02/96 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): SUITABILITY. THE

AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$5,459.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$3,000.00 JOINTLY AND

SEVERALLY; INTEREST, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO

CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; OTHER MONETARY RELIEF, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$150.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY.

[NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 96-00262]

12/15/98: 4/01/96 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): BRCH OF FIDUCIARY

6

DT; SUITABILITY; ACCOUNT RELATED - FAILURE TO SUPERVISE; CHURNING. THE AWARD

INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$80,000.00,

AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$18,500.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD

ARBITRATION CASE NO. 96-01259]

12/15/98: 2/27/96 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): ACCOUNT RELATED-OTHER. THE

AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$425,387.50; ATTORNEY'S FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; OTHER

COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; OTHER MONETARY RELIEF, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION

CASE NO. 94-00191]

12/15/98: 11/27/95 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): MISREPRESENTATION;

CHURNING; SUITABILITY; OMISSION OF FACTS. THE AWARD INCLUDED:

ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$53,535.15. RELIEF

REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 94-03243]

12/15/98: 9/13/95 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): BRCH OF FIDUCIARY DT;

ACCOUNT RELATED - FAILURE TO SUPERVISE. THE AWARD INCLUDED:

ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$110,000.00; INTEREST,

AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00.

RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO.

94-02200]

12/15/98: 8/25/95 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): SUITABILITY;

MISREPRESENTATION; OMISSION OF FACTS; BRCH OF FIDUCIARY DT. THE AWARD

INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT

AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$20,000.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; OTHER MONETARY RELIEF,

AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND

7

SEVERALLY; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO

CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; ATTORNEY'S FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD

ARBITRATION CASE NO. 93-01136]

12/15/98: 7/19/95 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): ACCOUNT

RELATED-ERRORS-CHARGES. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES,

AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$16,260.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN

FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 93-01556]

12/15/98: 5/18/95 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

MISREPRESENTATION; ACCOUNT RELATED-NEGLIGENCE; ACCOUNT RELATED-BREACH OF

CONTRACT; BRCH OF FIDUCIARY DT. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY

DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$16,500.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO

CUSTOMER-$16,500.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES,

AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$87,160.89, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$30,250.00

JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY;

PUNITIVE/EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO

CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$950.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY;

ATTORNEY'S FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO

CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; OTHER MONETARY RELIEF, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD

ARBITRATION CASE NO. 94-00927]

12/15/98: 4/10/95 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

MISREPRESENTATION; ACCOUNT RELATED-BREACH OF CONTRACT; ACCOUNT

RELATED-NEGLIGENCE; OTHER. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES,

AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$360,000.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$36,000.00

JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; INTEREST, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT

AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO.

93-04048]

8

12/15/98: 3/27/95 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): EXECUTIONS-FAILURE TO

EXECUTE; BRCH OF FIDUCIARY DT. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY

DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$9,000.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN

DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 95-00856]

12/15/98: 2/27/95 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): MISREPRESENTATION; ACCOUNT

RELATED-NEGLIGENCE; ACCOUNT RELATED-BREACH OF CONTRACT. THE AWARD INCLUDED:

ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$292,533.00; ATTORNEY'S

FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; INTEREST, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00; PUNITIVE/EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00;

TREBLE DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$897,599.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE

BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 93-04686]



To: Ellen who wrote (37)12/16/1998 5:38:00 PM
From: Ellen  Respond to of 86
 
FAHN - part 4

12/15/98: 1/13/95 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): CHURNING; SUITABILITY;

SUITABILITY; BRCH OF FIDUCIARY DT. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY

DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$200,000.00; OTHER MONETARY RELIEF, AMOUNT

ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$10,000.00; ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$115,000.00; PUNITIVE/EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$500,000.00; INTEREST, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; ATTORNEY'S

FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION

CASE NO. 92-04340]

12/15/98: 1/05/95 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): BRCH OF FIDUCIARY

DT; ACCOUNT RELATED-NEGLIGENCE; ACCOUNT RELATED-BREACH OF CONTRACT; ACCOUNT

RELATED - FAILURE TO SUPERVISE. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY

DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$149,617.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO

CUSTOMER-$156,000.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; INTEREST, AMOUNT ASKED BY

9

CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY;

ATTORNEY'S FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO

CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD

ARBITRATION CASE NO. 92-02673]

12/15/98: 1/03/95 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): SUITABILITY; CHURNING;

ACCOUNT RELATED - FAILURE TO SUPERVISE; BRCH OF FIDUCIARY DT. THE AWARD

INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$250,000.00;

PUNITIVE/EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$250,000.00; INTEREST,

AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; ATTORNEY'S FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION

CASE NO. 94-05408]

12/15/98: 11/25/94 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

MISREPRESENTATION; OMISSION OF FACTS; SUITABILITY; UNAUTHORIZED TRADING. THE

AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$200,000.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$25,000.00 JOINTLY AND

SEVERALLY; INTEREST, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO

CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; OTHER MONETARY RELIEF, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD

ARBITRATION CASE NO. 93-01748]

12/15/98: 8/29/94 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT FILED 4/28/94; FAHNESTOCK & CO., INC. (MEMBER

FIRM) WAS FINED $800.00 BY THE NASD FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF SECTION C 2(D)

OF THE RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE FOR SOES IN THAT THE CERTAIN

INDIVIDUALS ENTERED ORDERS ON AN AGENCY BASIS INTO SOES FOR SECURITIES IN

WHICH THEY WERE REGISTERED MARKET MAKERS. [NASD COMPLANT NO. CMS940036 AWC]

12/15/98: 7/11/94 NYSE ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF A NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION

INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

10

FAILURE TO PROPERLY CANCEL A GOOD-TILL-CANCELLED ORDER. THE AWARD INCLUDED:

ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER $10,000.00, AMOUNT

AWARDED TO CUSTOMER $9,200.00. [NYSE ARBITRATION CASE NO. 1993-003506]

12/15/98: 6/28/94 MASSACHUSETTS FINE

THE FIRM AGREED WITH THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS TO PAY THE DIVISION COSTS OF

$3,500 AND A FINE OF $6,500 AND TO COMPLY WITH ALL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS

RELATING TO THE TRANSACTION OF BUSINESS IN SECURITIES IN MASSACHUSETTS. THE

STATE ALLEGED THAT THE FIRM ACQUIESCED IN AND APPROVED A "BOOK-SHARING"

ARRANGEMENT BY WHICH MASSACHUSETTS INVESTORS WERE MISLED AS TO THE

REGISTRATION STATUS OF ITS AGENTS, THEREBY CONSITUTING A DEVICE, SCHEME, OR

ARTIFICE TO DEFRAUD INVESTORS IN VIOLATION OF M.G.L. c. 110A SECTION 101. [MA

DOCKET/CASE NO. E-90-118]

12/15/98: 6/22/94 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): BRCH OF FIDUCIARY

DT; ACCOUNT RELATED - FAILURE TO SUPERVISE; MISREPRESENTATION; SUITABILITY.

THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$6,753.60, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$6,753.60 JOINTLY AND

SEVERALLY; ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$44,520.90,

AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$44,520.90 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY;

ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$16,409.00, AMOUNT

AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$16,409.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE

NO. 93-01989]

12/15/98: 6/02/94 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT FILED 3/7/94; FAHNESTOCK & CO., INC. (MEMBER

FIRM) WAS FINED $250 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE III, SECTION 1 OF

THE ASSOCIATION'S RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT MEMBER FIRM UPDATED

QUOTATIONS IN THE BULLETIN BOARD SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE ALLOWABLE TIME FOR

UPDATING FOREIGN OR ADR SECURITIES ON THE BULLETIN BOARD. [NASD COMPLAINT NO.

CMS940021 AWC]

12/15/98: 4/07/94 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): UNAUTHORIZED TRADING;

11

CHURNING; ACCOUNT RELATED - FAILURE TO SUPERVISE; SUITABILITY. THE AWARD

INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$86,317.00.

RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO.

92-04192]

12/15/98: 3/30/94 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): CHURNING;

SUITABILITY; ACCOUNT RELATED - FAILURE TO SUPERVISE; ACCOUNT

RELATED-NEGLIGENCE. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT

ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$41,845.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$3,220.00 JOINTLY

AND SEVERALLY; ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00,

AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$2,558.00. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 93-01701]

12/15/98: 2/28/94 NYSE ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF A NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION

INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

FAILURE TO PLACE AN ORDER TO PURCHASE PURSUANT TO CUSTOMER'S INSTRUCTIONS. THE

AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER

$50,000.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER $3,500.00. [NYSE ARBITRATION CASE NO.

1993-003283]

12/15/98: 2/04/94 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): SUITABILITY; BRCH

OF FIDUCIARY DT; ACCOUNT RELATED - FAILURE TO SUPERVISE; MISREPRESENTATION.

THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$169,734.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$146,488.00 JOINTLY AND

SEVERALLY. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 92-02358]

12/15/98: 1/06/94 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

EXECUTIONS-EXECUTION PRICE. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES,

AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$28,500.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$28,506.00

JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; INTEREST, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT

AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO.

12

93-04410]

12/15/98: 12/21/93 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): BRCH OF FIDUCIARY DT;

ACCOUNT RELATED-NEGLIGENCE; ACCOUNT RELATED - FAILURE TO SUPERVISE;

SUITABILITY. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$77,500.00; INTEREST, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$31,080.90;

ATTORNEY'S FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; OTHER MONETARY RELIEF,

AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL.

[NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 92-03014]



To: Ellen who wrote (37)12/16/1998 5:43:00 PM
From: Ellen  Respond to of 86
 
FAHN - last part

12/15/98: 12/02/93 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): OMISSION OF FACTS;

MISREPRESENTATION; SUITABILITY. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY

DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$10,000.00; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00; ATTORNEY'S FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00;

PUNITIVE/EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00. RELIEF REQUESTS

HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 93-04305]

12/15/98: 11/15/93 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT FILED AUGUST 12, 1993; FAHNESTOCK & CO., INC.

(MEMBER FIRM) WAS FINED $250.00 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE III,

SECTION 1 OF THE ASSOCIATION'S RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT CERTAIN

INDIVIDUALS UPDATED QUOTATIONS IN THE BULLETIN BOARD SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE

ALLOWABLE TIME FOR UPDATING FOREIGN OR ADR SECURITIES ON THE BULLETIN BOARD.

[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS930042 AWC]

12/15/98: 5/05/93 IOWA FINE

ORDERED TO PAY A CIVIL PENALTY OF $500 BY THE STATE OF IOWA WHICH THE STATE

ALLEGED THE FIRM FILED AUDITED FINANCIALS LATE.

12/15/98: 3/02/93 NYSE ARBITRATION

13

SUBJECT OF A NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION

INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

UNAUTHORIZED TRADES AND OVERCHARGED OF COMMISSIONS. THE AWARD INCLUDED:

ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER $24,238.03, AMOUNT

AWARDED TO CUSTOMER $2,700.00 AND DEPOSIT OF $400.00 PLUS FILING FEE OF

$120.00. [NYSE ARBITRATION CASE NO. 1992-002532]

12/15/98: 1/06/93 GEORGIA CEASE AND DESIST ORDER

THE STATE OF GEORGIA ISSUED A CEASE AND DESIST ORDER AGAINST THE FIRM FOR

FAILURE TO SUPERVISE THEIR SALESMEN, ALLOWING THEM TO OFFER FOR SALE

SECURITIES TO RESIDENTS OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA PRIOR TO BECOMING REGISTERED

WITH THE COMMISSIONER OF SECURITIES. [DOCKET/CASE NO. 50-92-0505]

12/15/98: 12/22/92 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): SUITABILITY;

CHURNING; BRCH OF FIDUCIARY DT; ACCOUNT RELATED - FAILURE TO SUPERVISE. THE

AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$50,000.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$50,000.00 JOINTLY AND

SEVERALLY. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 91-03843]

12/15/98: 12/21/92 NYSE ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF A NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A

PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

MISREPRESENTATIONS, UNSUITABLE INVESTMENTS, FAILURE TO FOLLOW CUSTOMER'S

INSTRUCTIONS AND SELF DEALING. ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER $19,160.00, CUSTOMER'S CLAIM IS DENIED. [NYSE ARBITRATION CASE NO.

1992-002597]

12/15/98: 10/05/92 GEORGIA CEASE AND DESIST ORDER

THE FIRM WAS ORDERED BY THE GEORGIA SECURITIES COMMISSION TO CEASE AND DESIST

ALL OFFERS FOR SALE AND SALES IN AND FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA IN VIOLATION OF

THE STATE SECURITIES ACT OF 1973 AS AMENDED. [GEORGIA DOCKET CASE NO.

50-92-0505]

12/15/98: 6/30/92 NASD ARBITRATION

14

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): EXECUTIONS-FAILURE

TO EXECUTE; MISREPRESENTATION; ACCOUNT RELATED-ERRORS-CHARGES. THE AWARD

INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$120,000.00,

AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$60,000.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD ARBITRATION

CASE NO. 91-03675]

12/15/98: 6/26/92 NYSE CENSURE AND FINE

CONSENT ORDER; FAHNESTOCK & CO., INC. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EDWARD A. VINER &

CO., INC.) WAS CENSURED AND FINED FOR $200,000 AND AN UNDERTAKING BY THE NEW

YORK STOCK EXCHANGE FOR VIOLATION OF THE FOLLOWING SECURITIES EXCHANGE RULES:

VIOLATED SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION (SEC) REGULATION 240.15C3-1 BY

COMPUTING ITS NET CAPITAL INACCURATELY; VIOLATED REGULATION 240.15C3-3(E) IN

THAT IT INCORRECTLY COMPUTED THE AMOUNT REQUIRED TO BE DEPOSITED INTO ITS

SPECIAL RESERVE BANK ACCOUNT, AND FAILED TO MAINTAIN ITS SPECIAL RESERVE

ACCOUNT AT THE LEVEL REQUIRED BY THE REGULATION; VIOLATED REGULATION

240.15C3-3(I) IN THAT IT FAILED TO NOTIFY THE SEC AND THE EXCHANGE THAT IT

FAILED TO DESPOSIT THE AMOUNT REQUIRED TO BE DEPOSITED IN ITS SPECIAL RESERVE

ACCOUNT; VIOLATED REGULATION 240.15C3-3(B)(1) IN THAT IT DID NOT OBTAIN AND

MAINTAIN THE PHYSICAL POSSESSION OR CONTROL OF FULLY PAID AND EXCESS MARGIN

SECURITIES; VIOLATED REGULATION 240.15C3-3(D) IN THAT IT FAILED TO REDUCE TO

ITS POSSESSION OR CONTROL THE REQUIRED QUANTITY OF FULLY PAID AND EXCESS

MARGIN SECURITIES; VIOLATED REGULATION 240.15C3-3(M) IN THAT IT FAILED TO

PURCHASE IMMEDIATELY SECURITIES OF LIKE KIND TO THOSE SOLD BY A CUSTOMER AND

NOT OBTAINED FROM THE CUSTOMER WITHIN TEN DAYS AFTER SETTLEMENT DATE; VIOLATED

240.17A-3 IN THAT ITS CNS AND/OR SOME OTHER ACCOUNTS HAD NOT BEEN RECONCILED

ON A CURRENT BASIS; VIOLATED RULE 382(A) BY ENTERING INTO A CARRYING AGREEMENT

WITH ANOTHER BROKER WHICH AGREEMENT BECAME EFFECTIVE PRIOR TO BEING SUBMITTED

TO THE EXCHANGE; VIOLATED RULE 401 IN THAT IT: ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT TO

CARRY ACCOUNTS WHEN IT LACKED THE CAPACITY TO CLEAR THE ADDITIONAL BUSINESS,

PERMITTED CERTAIN CUSTOMERS TO ENGAGE IN OTC TRANSACTIONS AT PRICES NOT

REASONABLY RELATED TO PREVAILING MARKETS AND DID NOT HAVE PROCEDURES TO DETECT

OR PREVENT SUCH TRANSACTIONS, DID NOT HAVE PROCEDURES DESIGNED TO BRING

CERTAIN PRACTICES TO THE ATTENTION OF SENIOR MANAGEMENT, PERMITTED OPTION

TRADING IN ACCOUNTS WHICH HAD NOT BEEN PROPERLY APPROVED, IMPROPERLY CANCELLED

AND/OR REBILLED A PURCHASE TRANSACTIONS, AND PERMITTED TWO SUPERVISORY PERSONS

TO APPROVE ACCOUNT DESIGNATION CHANGES FOR ORDERS THEY ENTERED; VIOLATED RULE

431(A) BY PERMITTING A CUSTOMER TO EFFECT NEW TRANSACTIONS WITHOUT A REQUIRED

DEPOSIT OF FUNDS; VIOLATED RULE 431(B) BY PERMITTING CUSTOMERS TO MAINTAIN AN

INADEQUATE LEVEL OF MARGIN; VIOLATED RULE 431(D)(9) IN THAT CUSTOMERS EFFECTED

CASH TRANSACTIONS WHERE THE COST OF SECURITIES PURCHASED WAS MET BY THE SALE

OF THE SAME SECURITIES; VIOLATED RULE 432(B) IN THAT CUSTOMERS EFFECTED

TRANSACTIONS REQUIRING MARGIN AND THEN FURNISHED THE MARGIN BY LIQUIDATION OF

COMMITMENTS; VIOLATED REGULATION 240.4(C) OF REGULATION T BY PERMITTING

CUSTOMERS TO DEFER THE FURNISHING OF MARGIN; VIOLATED REGULATION 240.4(D) BY

FAILING TO TAKE APPROPRIATE LIQUIDATION ACTION; VIOLATED REGULATION 220.8(B)

15

BY FAILING TO OBTAIN FULL CASH PAYMENT IN CASH ACCOUNTS ON TIME; VIOLATED

REGULATION 220.8(B)(4) BY FAILING TO TAKE APPROPRIATE LIQUIDATION ACTION;

VIOLATED REGULATION 220.8(C) BY FAILING TO WITHDRAW THE PRIVILEGE OF DELAYING

PAYMENT BEYOND TRADE DATE AS REQUIRED; VIOLATED RULE 410 BY PERMITTING A

CHANGE IN ACCOUNT DESIGNATION WITHOUT RECORDING THE REASON FOR THE CHANGE;

VIOLATED RULE 405 IN THAT DOCUMENTS WERE MISSING FROM ITS NEW ACCOUNT

DEPARTMENT; VIOLATED RULE 410(A) BY PERMITTING ACCOUNT DESIGNATION CHANGES TO

BE AUTHORIZED BY A PERSON WHO WAS NOT QUALIFIED AS A C SUPERVISORY PERSON;

VIOLATED RULE 722(C) BY FAILING TO MAINTAIN REQUIRED OPTION DOCUMENTATION AT A

BRANCH OFFICE; VIOLATED RULE 722(D) IN THAT IT TRANSACTED OPTIONS BUSINESS

WITH THE PUBLIC FROM A BRANCH OFFICE, THE PRINCIPAL SUPERVISOR OF WHICH, WAS

NOT A REGISTERED OPTIONS PRINCIPAL; VIOLATED RULE 342(A) IN THAT IT FAILED TO

PROPERLY SUPERVISE CERTAIN OF ITS BUSINESS ACTIVITY AND CARRIED DISCRETIONARY

ACCOUNTS NOT SUBJECT TO THE DESIGNATED SUPERVISORY REVIEWS OF SUCH ACCOUNTS;

AND VIOLATED RULE 342(B) BY FAILING TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE SUPERVISION AND

CONTROL AND FAILING TO HAVE IN PLACE A SEPARATE SYSTEM OF FOLLOW UP AND

REVIEW. [NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE DOCKET/CASE NO. 92-68]

12/15/98: 6/05/92 AMEX ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A

PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): FAILURE TO

SELL CERTAIN STOCK. ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$7,208.54; CLAIMS AGAINST THE FIRM WERE DENIED.

12/15/98: 5/12/92 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): UNAUTHORIZED TRADING;

SUITABILITY. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$11,925.00; SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-;

ATTORNEY'S FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION

CASE NO. 91-00792]

12/15/98: 1/30/92 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): ACCOUNT

RELATED-ERRORS-CHARGES; TRADING DISPUTES-BUY IN. THE AWARD INCLUDED:

ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$101,053.22, AMOUNT

AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$44,189.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE

NO. 90-00521]

16

12/15/98: 12/21/91 NYSE ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF A NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A

PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

UNSUITABILITY; FRAUD; FAILURE TO SUPERVISE; NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION.

ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$89,629.00; CUSTOMER'S

CLAIMS WERE DISMISSED. [NYSE ARBITRATION CASE NO. 001077]

12/15/98: 12/12/91 NYSE ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF A NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A

PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

UNSUITABILITY, FRAUD, FAILURE TO SUPERVISE AND NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION.

ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER $89,629.00, CUSTOMER'S

CLAIM IS DISMISSED. [NYSE ARBITRATION CASE NO. 1991-001077]

12/15/98: 7/19/91 CBOE ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF A CHICAGO BOARD OPTIONS EXCHANGE (CBOE) ARBITRATION AWARD. THE

ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING

DISPUTE(S): CUSTOMER SEEKS TO RECOVER MONEY DUE TO THE ACTIONS, OMISSIONS OR

ERRORS OF THE RESPONDENTS. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES,

AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER $3,808.75. [CBOE DOCKET/CASE NO. 91 NM 2]

12/15/98: 5/18/90 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): ACCOUNT

RELATED-OTHER. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED

BY CUSTOMER-$34,505.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$30,255.00; OTHER COSTS,

AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$500.00. [NASD

ARBITRATION CASE NO. 89-01049]

12/15/98: 3/19/90 NYSE ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF A NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION

INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

UNAUTHORIZED LIQUIDATION OF CUSTOMER'S MARGIN ACCOUNT WHICH RESULTED IN LOSSES

17

OF SUBSEQUENT APPRECIATION GAINS AND ADDITIONAL BROKERAGE FEES. THE AWARD

INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER $17,873.57

PLUS COSTS AND BROKERAGE FEES, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER $11,526.00 INCLUSIVE

OF INTEREST THROUGH THIS DATE. [NYSE ARBITRATION CASE NO. 1990]

12/15/98: 11/09/89 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): EXECUTIONS-FAILURE TO

EXECUTE; ACCOUNT RELATED-MARGIN CALLS. THE AWARD INCLUDED:

ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$152,713.45; OTHER

COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN

FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 88-01261]

12/15/98: 7/26/89 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): UNAUTHORIZED TRADING;

MISREPRESENTATION. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT

ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$2,400.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD

ARBITRATION CASE NO. 87-00711]

12/15/98: 3/10/89 NYSE FINE

THE FIRM WAS FINED $2,500 BY THE NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE FOR VIOLATION OF

EXCHANGE RULE 132.30 AND FAILED TO SUBMIT AUDIT TRAIL DATA TO QUALIFIED

CLEARING AGENCY REGARDING STOCK TRANSACTIONS FOR THE WEEKS OF AUGUST 1,

SEPTEMBER 12 AND OCTOBER 17, 1988.

12/15/98: 4/21/87 CBOE FINE

OFFER OF SETTLEMENT; FAHNESTOCK & CO., INC. (FIRM) [FORMERLY KNOWN AS EDWARD

A. VINER & CO.] WAS FINED $500 BY THE BUSINESS CONDUCT COMMITTEE OF THE

CHICAGO BOARD OPTIONS (CBOE) IN VIOLATION OF THE CBOE EXCHANGE RULES. THE CBOE

ALLEGED THAT FIRM FAILED TO SUBMIT TO THE EXCHANGE ON BEHALF OF ONE OF ITS

NON-MEMBER CUSTOMERS A CBOE EXERCISE ADVICE FORM FOR THE CUSTOMER'S EXERCISE

OF 400 STANDARD & POOR'S 100 STOCK INDEX ("OEX") AUG 220 CALL OPTION

CONTRACTS. ON AUGUST 13, 1986 VINER FAILED TO TIME STAMP THE INTERNAL EXERCISE

NOTICE IT PREPARED FOR THE EXERCISE OF THE OEX OPTION CONTRACTS REFERRED TO

ABOVE. THE ACTS, PRACTICES AND CONDUCT DESCRIBED ABOVE CONSTITUTE SEPARATE

VIOLATIONS OF EXCHANGE RULE 11.1 BY FIRM. [CBOE FILE NO. 87-0006]

18

12/15/98: 12/09/86 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT FILED DECEMBER 9, 1986; FAHNESTOCK & CO., INC.

[FORMERLY KNOWN AS EDWARD A. VINER & CO., INC.] (MEMBER FIRM) WAS FINED $1,000

BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF PART I, SECTION C.3.(A) OF SCHEDULE D OF THE

ASSOCIATION'S BY-LAWS IN THAT MEMBER FIRM ENTERED QUOTATIONS I INTO THE NASDAQ

SYSTEM ON 9/29/86, 10/2/86, AND 10/3/86 THAT WERE NOT REASONABLY RELATED TO

THE PREVAILING MARKET. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. MS-456-AWC]

12/15/98: 4/06/82 NYSE FINE

STIPULATION OF FACTS AND CONSENT TO PENALTY; FINED $25,000 BY THE NEW YORK

STOCK EXCHANGE. WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE EXCHANGE'S ALLEGATIONS, THE

FIRM CONSENTED TO THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: THE FIRM VIOLATED EXCHANGE RULE

343(b) IN CONNECTION WITH SUPERVISION AND CONTROL OF THE ACTIVITIES OF ONE OF

ITS EMPLOYEES; VIOLATED EXCHANGE RULE 54 IN THAT IT PERMITTED AN EMPLOYEE WHO

WAS NOT A MEMBER OF THE EXCHANGE TO TRANSACT BUSINESS ON THE BOND FLOOR; AND

VIOLATED EXCHANGE RULE 120 IN THAT IT FAILED TO ADHERE TO THE PRINCIPLES OF

GOOD PRACTICES IN THE CONDUCT OF ITS BUSINESS AFFAIRS IN CONNECTION WITH THE

PURCHASES AND SALES OF CERTAIN BONDS. IN ADDITION TO THE $25,000 FINE, THE

FIRM CONSENTED TO ANCILLARY REQUIREMENTS WHEREBY IT AGREED TO (1) WITHDRAWAL

OF ITS EMPLOYEES FROM THE BOND FLOOR OF THE EXCHANGE; (2) PREPARATION,

ADOPTION AND CIRCULATION OF NEW WRITTEN POLICIES DESIGNED TO ASSURE COMPLIANCE

WITH ALL EXCHANGE RULES INVOLVING THE SUPERVISION OF THE ACTIVITIES OF

EMPLOYEES ENGAGED IN BOND TRADING; AND (3) ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE FIRM'S

COMPLIANCE POLICIES WITH RESPECT TO ON-FLOOR AND OFF-FLOOR BOND TRADING AND

PROCEDURES FOR TWO YEARS. [NYSE DECISION NOS. 82-30 AND 82-31]

12/15/98: 11/18/71 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

DECISION RENDERED IN COMPLAINT FILED 10/30/70 BY THE NASD AGAINST FAHNESTOCK &

CO., INC. (MEMBER FIRM) ON 1/13/71 WHEREIN MEMBER FIRM IS FINED $1,000 TO BE

FINAL 2/12/71. ON 2/12/71 COMPLAINT WAS CALLED BEFORE THE B/G FOR REVIEW. DBCC

DECISION IS STAYED. B/G DECISION RENDERED 10/1/71 WHEREIN FINDINGS MADE BY

DBCC ARE AFFIRMED BUT PENALTIES ARE INCREASED. MEMBER FIRM IS CENSURED AND

FINED $1,500. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. NY-1309]

12/15/98: 10/23/70 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

FAHNESTOCK & CO. WAS CENSURED ANF FINED $1200 BY THE NASD. [NASD COMPLAINT NO.

19

NY-1234]

20



To: Ellen who wrote (37)12/16/1998 5:53:00 PM
From: Ellen  Respond to of 86
 
MEMBER FIRM: WIEN SECURITIES CORP.

BD NUMBER: 10467

NASD Member Firm: WIEN SECURITIES CORP.

BD Number: 10467

12/15/98 SUMMARY INFORMATION

12/15/98: 11/24/97 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; WIEN SECURITIES CORPORATION WAS CENSURED AND

FINED $22,500.00 BY THE NASD'S DEPARTMENT OF ENFORCEMENT AND THE NATIONAL

BUSINESS CONDUCT COMMITTEE. THE NASD ALLEGED SEPARATE AND DISTINCT VIOLATIONS

OF NASD MARKETPLACE RULES 4632(A), 4642(A) AND 6620 IN THAT THE FIRM FAILED TO

DESIGNATE AS LATE TO ACT 10 TRANSACTIONS IN CERTAIN SECURITIES, 21

TRANSACTIONS IN CERTAIN SECURITIES AND 19 TRANSACTIONS IN CERTAIN SECURITIES.

THE FIRM COMMITTED SEPARATE AND DISTINCT VIOLATIONS OF NASD CONDUCT RULE 2110

IN THAT THE FIRM DESIGNATED AS LATE TO ACT NINE TRANSACTIONS IN CERTAIN

SECURITIES AND 18 TRANSACTIONS IN CERTAIN SECURITIES. IN ADDITION, THE FIRM

COMMITTED SEPERATE AND DISTINCT VIOLATIONS OF NASD MARKETPLACE RULES 4632(A),

4642 (A) AND 6620(A) IN THAT THE FIRM IMPROPERLY DESIGNATED TO ACT THREE

TRANSACTIONS IN CERTAIN SECURITIES, TWO TRANSACTIONS IN CERTAIN SECURITIES AND

SIX TRANSACTIONS IN CERTAIN SECURITIES. FURTHERMORE, THE FIRM COMMITTED

SEPARATE AND DISTINCT VIOLATIONS OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE COMMISSION RULE

17A-4 AND NASD CONDUCT RULE 3110 IN THAT FOR THE PERIOD OF, ON OR ABOUT MAY

1994 THROUGH APRIL 1996, THE FIRM FAILED TO PRESERVE A MEMORANDUM OF EACH

BROKERAGE ORDER, AND OF ANY OTHER INSTRUCTION, GIVEN OR RECEIVED FOR THE

PURCHASE OR SALE OF SECURITIES, WHETHER EXECUTED OR UNEXECUTED; AND A

MEMORANDUM OF EACH PURCHASE AND SALE FOR THE ACCOUNT OF THE FIRM. FINALLY,

THE FIRM FAILED TO ESTABLISH, MAINTAIN AND ENFORCE WRITTEN SUPERVISORY

PROCEDURES REASONABLY DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE

SECURITIES LAWS AND REGULATIONS REGARDING TRADE REPORTING, RECORD KEEPING, THE

LIMIT ORDER PROTECTION INTERPRETATION AND CUSTOMER CONFIRMATIONS. THIS

CONSTITUTES A VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULES 2110 AND 3010***$22,500 PAID ON

2/20/98, INVOICE NO. 98-MS-103***[NASD COMPLAINT# CMS970054]hk

12/15/98: 7/02/97 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; WIEN SECURITIES CORP. WAS FINED $3,000 BY THE

MARKET REGULATION AND NATIONAL BUSINESS CONDUCT COMMITTEE FOR VIOLATION OF

MARKETPLACE RULE 4613(d) FOR ENTERING QUOTATIONS INTO THE NASDAQ SYSTEM THAT

EXCEEDED THE PARAMETERS FOR MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SPREADS.*** $3,000 PAID ON

8/21/97, INVOICE #97-MS-676***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS960070 AWC] hk

1

12/15/98: 10/26/92 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; FINED $500 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF PART

IV, SECTION 2(B) OF THE SCHEDULE D FOR BACKING AWAY. [NASD COMPLAINT NO.

CMS920087AWC]

12/15/98: 10/23/91 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; WIEN SECURITIES CORP. WAS FINED $500 BY THE

NASD FOR VIOLATION OF ARTICLE III, SECTION 1 AND SEC RULE 15c2-11. [NASD

COMPLAINT NO. MS-1141-AWC(A)] jd

12/15/98: 4/02/91 ILLINOIS STIPULATION ORDER

ILLINOIS ENTERED A TEMPORARY ORDER WHICH SUSPENDS THE FIRM'S REGISTRATION IN

THE STATE OF ILLINOIS. IT IS BASED UPON A DETERMINATION THAT RESPONDENT FAILED

TO HAVE A SALESPERSON REGISTERED IN THE STATE OF ILLINOIS AS REQUIRED BY THE

ILLINOIS SECURITIES LAW OF 1953, AS AMENDED. THE TEMPORARY ORDER SHALL BECOME

FINAL IN 30 DAYS UNLESS A HEARING IS REQUESTED. **RESPONDENT AGREED TO PROVIDE

EVIDENCE THAT IT HAS COMPLIED WITH RULE 130.810(d)(4) OF THE ILLINOIS

SECURITIES LAW OF 1953, AS AMENDED AND HAS SUBMITTED $250.00 FOR THE COST OF

THE ILLINOIS SECURITIES DEPARTMENT INVESTIGATION. THE ILLINOIS SECURITIES

DEPARTMENT HAS AGREED TO DISMISS THE PENDING ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING AND LIFT

THE PENDING TEMPORARY ORDER OF SUSPENSION. **RESPONDENT REQUESTED A HEARING TO

DETERMINE WHETHER THE CURRENT TEMPORARY ORDER OF SUSPENSION IS APPROPRIATE.

HEARING IS SCHEDULED FOR MAY 15, 1991. THE TEMPORARY ORDER OF SUSPENSION SHALL

REMAIN IN EFFECT UNTIL FURTHER ORDER AND DETERMINATION. [IL DOCKET/CASE# NOT

PROVIDED]jd

12/15/98: 10/15/90 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSET; WIEN SECURITIES CORP. WAS FINED $500 BY THE

NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF PART VI, SECTION 2(d) OF SCHEDULE D FOR ENTERING NASDAQ

QUOTATIONS CONTAINING EXCESS SPREADS. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. #MS-967-AWC (A)]jd

12/15/98: 9/10/81 SIPC LIQUIDATION

A CONSENT ORDER WAS ENTERED IN SECURITIES INVESTOR PROTECTION CORPORATION V.

2

M.S. WIEN & CO., APPOINTING A TRUSTEE FOR THE LIQUIDATION OF THE FIRM PURSUANT

TO THE SECURITIES INVESTOR PROTECTION ACT OF 1970. [NJ DOCKET/CASE# CIV NO.

81-2864-U.S. ]bo

12/15/98: 5/01/72 SEC CEASE AND DESIST ORDER

CONSENT; M.S. WEIN & CO., INC. CONSENTED, WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE

TRUTH OF THE ALLEGATION, A CEASE AND DESIST ORDER BY THE SEC. THE SEC

COMPLAINT ALLEGED THAT THE FIRM PARTICIPATED WITH A CERTAIN FIRM IN A TENDER

OFFER FOR CERTAIN SHARES IN VIOLATION OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE SECURITIES

EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934. THE FIRM WAS ENJOINED FROM VIOLATING SUCH PROVISIONS OF

THE ACT. [SEC COMPLAINT # NOT PROVIDED]bo

3



To: Ellen who wrote (37)12/16/1998 5:55:00 PM
From: Ellen  Respond to of 86
 
MEMBER FIRM: KNIGHT SECURITIES, INC.

BD NUMBER: 38599

NASD Member Firm: KNIGHT SECURITIES, INC.

BD Number: 38599

12/15/98 SUMMARY INFORMATION

12/15/98: 4/17/98 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; KNIGHT SECURITIES, INC. WAS CENSURED AND FINED

$10,000.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITY OCCURRED:

FIRM EXECUTED 116 SHORT SALE TRANSACTIONS WITHOUT IDENTIFYING THE TRADES AS

SHORT SALES IN THE AUTOMATED CONFIRMATION TRANSACTION SYSTEM (ACT) IN

VIOLATION OF NASD MARKETPLACE RULE 6130. FIRM EXECUTED FOUR SHORT SALE

TRANSACTIONS IN NASDAQ NATIONAL MARKET SECURITIES AT OR BELOW THE PRECEDING

INSIDE BID WHEN THE CURRENT INSIDE BID WAS BELOW THE PRECEDING INSIDE BID IN

EACH OF THE SECURITIES IN VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULE 3350. FIRM ALSO

EXECUTED 21 SHORT SALES WITHOUT MAKING AN AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATION FOR EACH

OF THE TRANSACTIONS IN VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULE 3370.***$10,000.00 PAID

ON 5/22/98, INVOICE #98-MS-42***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS980027]hk

12/15/98: 8/22/97 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; KNIGHT SECURITIES, INC. WAS CENSURED AND FINED

$5,500.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FIRM VIOLATED SEC RULE

11Ac-1 ("SEC FIRM QUOTE RULE"), NASD CONDUCT RULES 2110, 3010 AND 3320, AND

MARKETPLACE RULE 4613(b) FOR THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITY: FIRM FAILED TO EXECUTE 28

ORDERS WHICH WERE PRESENTED TO THE FIRM AT THE FIRM'S PUBLISHED BID OR

PUBLISHED OFFER, AND, THEREFORE, FAILED TO HONOR ITS PUBLISHED QUOTATION. IN

ADDITION, THE FIRM FAILED TO ESTABLISH, MAINTAIN AND ENFORCE WRITTEN

SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE ABOVE RULES.***$5,000.00

PAID ON 10/1/97 INVOICE NO. 97-MS-830***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS970012 AWC]hk

12/15/98: 7/11/97 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; KNIGHT SECURITIES, INC. WAS CENSURED AND FINED

$1,000.00 BY THE NASD WITH A REQUIREMENT TO CONDUCT A COMPLIANCE CONFERENCE.

THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FIRM VIOLATED MARKETPLACE RULE 4613(d) FOR ENTERING

QUOTATIONS IN NASDAQ NATIONAL MARKET SYSTEM SECURITIES THAT EXCEEDED THE

PARAMETERS FOR MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SPREADS. ***$1,000.00 PAID ON 8/22/97,

1

INVOICE #97-MS-674***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS960065 AWC]hk

12/15/98: 6/16/97 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; KNIGHT SECURITIES WAS FINED $2,000.00 BY THE

NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FIRM VIOLATED SEC RULES 17a-3, 17a-4 AND NASD

CONDUCT RULES 2110 AND 3010 IN THAT THE FIRM FAILED TO CREATE AND MAINTAIN A

RECORD OF A CUSTOMER LIMIT ORDER THAT WAS RECEIVED AND RELAYED TO MASH. IN

ADDITION, THE FIRM FAILED TO ENFORCE WRITTEN SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES DESIGNED

TO PREVENT THE VIOLATION.*** $2,000.00 PAID ON 7/14/97, INVOICE

#97-MS-543***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS960119 AWC]hk

12/15/98: 6/10/97 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; KNIGHT SECURITIES WAS FINED $2,000.00 BY THE

NASD WITH A REQUIREMENT TO CONDUCT A RULE EDUCATION CLASS FOR ITS TRADERS. THE

NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FIRM VIOLATED MARKETPLACE RULE 4613(d) FOR ENTERING

QUOTATIONS IN NASDAQ NATIONAL MARKET SYSTEM SECURITIES THAT EXCEEDED THE

PARAMETERS FOR MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SPREADS IN THREE SECURITIES.***$2,000.00 PAID

ON 7/21/97, INVOICE #97-MS-546*** [NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS960187 (A) AWC]hk

12/15/98: 6/10/97 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT, KNIGHT SECURITIES WAS FINED $6,000.00 BY THE

NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FIRM VIOLATED NASD CONDUCT RULES 2110, 3010

AND IM-2110-2 FOR TRADING THROUGH A CUSTOMER LIMIT ORDER. THE FIRM ALSO

FAILED TO EXECUTE 16 CUSTOMER LIMIT ORDERS WITHIN ONE MINUTE OF THE

TRANSACTION, TRIGGERING THE OBLIGATION TO SATISFY SUCH ORDERS. THE FIRM'S

MONITORING SYSTEM FAILED TO CAPTURE THE TRADE THROUGH A CUSTOMER LIMIT ORDER.

IN ADDITION, THE FIRM'S WRITTEN SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES FAILED TO DETECT OR

PREVENT THE VIOLATION.***$6,000.00 PAID ON 7/14/97, INVOICE #97-MS548***[NASD

COMPLAINT NO. CMS960216(A) AWC]hk

12/15/98: 4/23/97 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; KNIGHT SECURITIES WAS FINED $2,000.00 BY THE

NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FIRM ENTERED OR MAINTAINED QUOTATIONS IN THE

NASDAQ STOCK MARKET, DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS, WHICH CAUSED A LOCKED

MARKET CONDITION TO OCCUR IN TWO SECURITIES.***$2,000.00 PAID ON 6/4/97,

INVOICE #97-MS-437*** [NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS960206]hk

2

12/15/98: 12/19/96 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER, AND CONSENT; KNIGHT SECURITIES WAS CENSURED AND

FINED $50,000.00 BY THE NASD FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF NASD CONDUCT RULES 2110

AND 3010. WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE ALLEGATIONS, THE FIRM CONSENTED TO

THE DESCRIBED SANCTIONS: THAT IT EXECUTED DAY LIMIT ORDERS AFTER SUCH ORDERS

HAD EXPIRED AND THAT THE FIRM FAILED TO ESTABLISH, MAINTAIN, AND ENFORCE

SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES THAT WOULD DETECT AND DETER THE ABOVE

CONDUCT.***$50,000.00 PAID ON 1/22/97, INVOICE NO. 97-MS-47*** [NASD COMPLAINT

NO. CMS960217]hk

3



To: Ellen who wrote (37)12/16/1998 5:57:00 PM
From: Ellen  Respond to of 86
 
MEMBER FIRM: GVR COMPANY

BD NUMBER: 31172

NASD Member Firm: GVR COMPANY

BD Number: 31172

12/15/98 SUMMARY INFORMATION

12/15/98: 1/23/97 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

OFFER OF SETTLEMENT; CENSURED AND FINED $2,500, JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY BY THE

NASD. THE NASD FILED A COMPLAINT AGAINST FIRM ALLEGING VIOLATIONS OF NASD

RULES 2110 AND 3010 (FORMERLY ARTICLE III, SECTIONS 1 AND 27 OF THE RULES OF

FAIR PRACTICE) IN THAT A CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL WAS ENGAGED IN THE INVESTMENT

BANKING OR SECURITIES BUSINESS OF MEMBER FIRM DESPITE THE FACT THAT HE WAS NOT

EFFECTIVELY QUALIFIED AND/OR REGISTERED WITH THE NASD IN AN APPROPRIATE

CAPACITY; AND, MEMBER FIRM, ACTING THROUGH A CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL, FAILED TO

ADEQUATELY SUPERVISE THE ACTIVITIES OF A CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL. [NASD COMPLAINT

NO. C8A960048]

1



To: Ellen who wrote (37)12/16/1998 6:00:00 PM
From: Ellen  Respond to of 86
 
MEMBER FIRM: HILL THOMPSON MAGID & CO INC

BD NUMBER: 2202

NASD Member Firm: HILL THOMPSON MAGID & CO INC

BD Number: 2202

12/15/98 SUMMARY INFORMATION

12/15/98: 5/18/98 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER & CONSENT; HILL, THOMPSON, MAGID & CO. (HILL) WAS FINED

$7,000 BY NASD REGULATION, INC.'S DEPARTMENT OF ENFORCEMENT AND THE NATIONAL

ADJUDICATORY COUNCIL. THE AWC ALLEGES THAT THE FOLLOWING VIOLATIONS OCCURRED:

HILL FAILED TO CONTEMPORANEOUSLY EXECUTE A CUSTOMER LIMIT ORDER AFTER IT

EXECUTED TRANSACTIONS FOR ITS OWN MARKET MAKING ACCOUNT. THE CONDUCT

CONSTITUTES A VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULE 2110 AND IM-2110-2. BETWEEN AT

LEAST AUGUST 21 AND OCTOBER 25, 1996, HILL FAILED TO MAKE, KEEP CURRENT, AND

PRESERVE RECORDS OF OPEN LIMIT ORDERS. THIS CONDUCT CONSTITUTES A VIOLATION OF

SEC RULES 17a-3 AND 17a-4 AND NASD CONDUCT RULE 3010. HILL FAILED TO

ESTABLISH, MAINTAIN AND ENFORCE WRITTEN SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES WITH RESPECT TO

MEMBER CUSTOMER LIMIT ORDERS. THIS CONDUCT CONSTITUTES A VIOLATION OF NASD

CONDUCT RULES 2110 AND 3010 [NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS980050 AWC]hk

12/15/98: 12/28/95 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HILL THOMPSON MAGID & CO INC. WAS FINED $250

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE III, SECTION 1 OF THE

ASSOCIATION'S RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT THE FIRM UPDATED A QUOTATION IN

THE BULLETIN BOARD SYSTEM WHICH WAS OUTSIDE THE ALLOWABLE TIME FOR UPDATING

FOREIGN OR ADR SECURITIES ON THE BULLETIN BOARD. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS950105

AWC] jm

12/15/98: 2/13/95 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HILL THOMPSON MGID & CO INC. WAS FINED $500 BY

THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE III, SECTION 1 OF THE

ASSOCIATION'S RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT THE FIRM UPDATED QUOTATIONS IN

THE BULLETIN BOARD SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE ALLOWABLE TIME FOR UPDATING FOREIGN OR

ADR SECURITIES ON THE BULLETIN BOARD. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS940127 AWC] jm

12/15/98: 4/19/94 NASD FINE

1

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HILL THOMPSON MAGID & CO INC. WAS FINED $250

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE III, SECTION 1 OF THE

ASSOCIATION'S RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT THE FIRM UPDATED QUOTATIONS IN

THE BULLETIN BOARD SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE ALLOWABLE TIME FOR UPDATING FOREIGN OR

ADR SECURITIES ON THE BULLETIN BOARD. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS940004 AWC] jm

12/15/98: 4/19/94 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HILL THOMPSON MAGID & CO INC. WAS FINED $250

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE III, SECTION 1 OF THE

ASSOCIATION'S RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT THE FIRM UPDATED QUOTATIONS IN

THE BULLETIN BOARD SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE ALLOWABLE TIME FOR UPDATING FOREIGN OR

ADR SECURITIES ON THE BULLETIN BOARD. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS940005 AWC] jm

12/15/98: 3/28/91 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HILL THOMPSON MAGID & CO INC. WAS FINED $250

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF PART VI, SECTION 5(a) OF THE

SCHEDULE D IN THAT THE FIRM FAILED TO REPORT THE NASDAQ VOLUME. [NASD

COMPLAINT NO. MS-976-AWC (A)] jm

12/15/98: 3/28/91 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HILL THOMPSON MAGID & CO INC. WAS FINED $500

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF PART VI, SECTION 5(a) OF SCHEDULE

D IN THAT THE FIRM FAILED TO REPORT THEIR NASDAQ VOLUME. [NASD COMPLAINT NO.

MS-1012-AWC (A)] jm

12/15/98: 1/27/86 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HILL THOMPSON MAGID & CO INC; WAS FINED $250

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF PART I SECTION C.3.(c) OF SCHEDULE

D OF THE ASSOCIATION'S BY-LAWS IN THAT THE FIRM FAILED TO REPORT ITS NASDAQ

VOLUME ON AUGUST 7, OCTOBER 10, AND DECEMBER 9, 1985. [NASD COMPLAINT NO.

MS-225-AWC] jm

12/15/98: 9/08/71 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

HILL THOMPSON MAGID & CO INC. WAS CENSURED AND FINED $1,000 BY THE NASD FOR

2

ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE III - SECTION 1 IN THAT THEY FILED AN INACCURATE

AND MISLEADING QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT ON OR ABOUT MAY 29, 1971. [NASD

COMPLAINT NO. #NY: SC-264] jm

12/15/98: 4/07/71 NASD SUSPENSION

ACCEPTANCE OF OFFER OF SETTLEMENT; HILL THOMPSON MAGID & CO INC. WAS SUSPENDED

FROM MEMBERSHIP IN THE ASSOCIATION FOR FIVE (5) BUSINESS DAYS, BY THE NASD FOR

ALLEGED FAILURE TO MAINTAIN AND KEEP CURRENT PROPER BOOKS AND RECORDS; AND,

ENTERED INTO TRANSACTIONS WITH PUBLIC CUSTOMERS AND OTHER BROKER-DEALERS WHEN

BY REASON OF THE CONDITION OF THE FIRM'S BOOKS AND RECORDS IT NEITHER KNEW NOR

COULD HAVE KNOWN ITS TRUE CAPITAL POSITION OR ITS ABILITY TO READILY

CONSUMMATE SUCH TRANSACTIONS AS THEY AROSE. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. NY-1185] jm

12/15/98: 6/28/62 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

HILL THOMPSON MAGID & CO INC. WAS CENSURED AND FINED $200 BY THE NASD FOR

ALLEGED FAILURE TO MAKE A BONA FIDE PUBLIC OFFERING OF A COMMON STOCK. [NASD

COMPLAINT NO. NY-510] jm

3



To: Ellen who wrote (37)12/16/1998 6:04:00 PM
From: Ellen  Respond to of 86
 
HRZG - part 1

MEMBER FIRM: HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC.

BD NUMBER: 2186

NASD Member Firm: HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC.

BD Number: 2186

12/15/98 SUMMARY INFORMATION

12/15/98: 11/04/98 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): ACCOUNT RELATED-BREACH OF

CONTRACT; EXECUTIONS-FAILURE TO EXECUTE; BRCH OF FIDUCIARY DT; OTHER. THE

AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$24,000.00; PUNITIVE/EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; INTEREST, AMOUNT

ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; OTHER MONETARY RELIEF, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00; REGULAR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-. RELIEF

REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 97-05316]

12/15/98: 7/20/98 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS CENSURED AND

FINED $10,000 BY THE NASD, AND AGREED TO AN UNDERTAKING TO REVISE THE FIRM'S

WRITTEN SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES RELATING TO FIRM QUOTE COMPLIANCE IN A MANNER

NOT UNACCEPTABLE TO THE STAFF. THE REVISED PROCEDURES SHOULD BE SUBMITTED

WITHIN 60 CALENDAR DAYS OF THE ACCEPTANCE OF THIS AWC BY THE NAC. THE NASD

ALLEGED THAT THE FOLLOWING VIOLATIONS OCCURRED: FIRM FAILED TO EXECUTE 85

PREFERENCED SELECTNET ORDERS WHICH WERE PRESENTED TO THE FIRM AT THE FIRM'S

PUBLISHED BID OR PUBLISHED OFFER IN AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO OR LESS THAN ITS

PUBLISHED QUOTATION SIZE, AND, THEREFORE, FAILED TO HONOR ITS PUBLISHED

QUOTATION. THIS CONDUCT CONSTITUTES SEPARATE AND DISTINCT VIOLATIONS OF SEC

RULE 11Ac1-1, NASD CONDUCT RULE 3320 AND NASD MARKETPLACE RULE 4613(b). [NASD

COMPLAINT NO. CMS980064 AWC]hk

12/15/98: 1/30/98 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED

$2,200.OO BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FIRM VIOLATED NASD

MARKETPLACE RULE 6130 FOR EXECUTING 11 SHORT SALE TRANSACTIONS WITHOUT

IDENTIFYING THE TRANSACTIONS AS SHORT SALE IN ITS REPORTING TO THE AUTOMATED

1

CONFIRMATION TRANSACTION SERVICE.***$2,200 PAID ON 4/10/98, INVOICE NO.

98-MS-306***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS970077 AWC] jm

12/15/98: 8/11/97 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS CENSURED AND

FINED $11,000.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FIRM VIOLATED NASD

CONDUCT RULES 2110, IM-2110-2, 3010 AND MARKETPLACE RULE 6130(d) FOR THE

FOLLOWING ACTIVITY: THE FIRM FAILED TO CONTEMPORANEOUSLY EXECUTE THREE

CUSTOMER LIMIT ORDERS; IMPROPERLY REPORTED 48 TRANSACTIONS THROUGH THE

AUTOMATED CONFIRMATION TRANSACTION SERVICE (ACT); AND FAILED TO ESTABLISH,

MAINTAIN AND ENFORCE WRITTEN SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES WITH RESPECT TO ITS LIMIT

ORDER ACTIVITY.***$11,000.00 PAID ON 10/31/97, INVOICE NO. 97-MS- 794***[NASD

COMPLAINT NO. CMS960214(A) AWC]hk

12/15/98: 7/25/97 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): UNAUTHORIZED TRADING;

ACCOUNT RELATED-MARGIN CALLS; OTHER. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY

DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$1,062.50; PUNITIVE/EXEMPLARY DAMAGES,

AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$1,250.00; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$42.53; ATTORNEY'S FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$1,196.00. RELIEF

REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 97-03104]

12/15/98: 7/11/97 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED

$2,500.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC

VIOLATED CONDUCT RULE 2110 FOR CANCELLING SIX CUSTOMERS TRANSACTIONS WHICH HAD

BEEN EXECUTED THROUGH ITS AUTOMATED EXECUTION SERVICE ("AUTO-EX") BECAUSE OF

ITS MISTAKEN BELIEF THAT THE TRANSACTION HAS BEEN ERRONEOUSLY

EXECUTED***$2,500.00 PAID ON 8/22/97, INVOICE #97-MS-692***[NASD DOCKET/CASE

NO. CMS 970002(A) AWC]

12/15/98: 6/10/97 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED

$5,000.00 WITH A REQUIREMENT TO SCHEDULE A COMPLIANCE CONFERENCE WITH NASD

REGULATION. THE NASD ALLEGES THAT THE FIRM VIOLATED MARKETPLACE RULE 4613(d)

FOR ENTERING QUOTATIONS INTO THE NASDAQ SYSTEM THAT EXCEEDED THE PARAMETERS

2

FOR MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SPREADS IN FIVE SECURITIES ON FIVE DAYS. ***$5,000.00

PAID ON 7/28/97, INVOICE #97-MS-540***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS 960050 AWC]

12/15/98: 4/23/97 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC WAS FINED

$15,000.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FIRM ENTERED QUOTATIONS IN

NASDAQ NATIONAL MARKET SYSTEM SECURITIES THAT EXCEEDED THE PARAMETERS FOR

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SPREADS.***$15,000.00 PAID ON 6/11/97, INVOICE

#97-MS-421***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS960186 AWC]hk

12/15/98: 4/23/97 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED

$8,000.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FIRM VIOLATED MARKETPLACE

RULE 4613(e) FOR ENTERING OR MAINTAINING QUOTATIONS IN THE NASDAQ STOCK

MARKET, DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS, WHICH CAUSED A LOCKED AND/OR CROSSED

MARKET CONDITION TO OCCUR IN FIVE SECURITIES.***$8,000 PAID ON 6/11/97,

INVOICE #97-MS-436***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS 960205AWC]

12/15/98: 2/21/97 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): UNAUTHORIZED TRADING;

MISREPRESENTATION; OMISSION OF FACTS; OTHER. THE AWARD INCLUDED:

ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$8,550.00;

PUNITIVE/EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$75,000.00; OTHER COSTS,

AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$5,650.00; INTEREST, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00.

RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO.

96-03496]

12/15/98: 1/27/97 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED

$1,000.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGES THAT THE FIRM VIOLATED CONDUCT RULE

2110 AND IM-2110-2 FOR FAILING TO PROTECT A 300 SHARE LIMIT ORDER AT THE TIME

IT WAS OBLIGATED TO DO SO.***$1,000.00 PAID ON 3/27/97, INVOICE

#97-MS-130***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS960121 AWC]hk

12/15/98: 7/15/96 NASD FINE

3

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $6,000

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED PART V, SECTION 2(d) OF SCHEDULE D TO THE

ASSOCIATION'S BY-LAWS IN THAT ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS, FIRM ENTERED QUOTATIONS

INTO THE NASDAQ SYSTEM THAT EXCEEDED THE PARAMETERS FOR THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE

SPREADS.*** $6,000.00 FULLY PAID AS OF 9/10/96, INVOICE #96-MS-592***[NASD

COMPLAINT NO. CMS960037]hk

12/15/98: 6/04/96 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

EXECUTIONS-EXECUTION PRICE; EXECUTIONS-FAILURE TO EXECUTE. THE AWARD

INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$9,375.00,

AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$9,375.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; OTHER MONETARY

RELIEF, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$150.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$150.00

JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; OTHER MONETARY RELIEF, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00,

AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD ARBITRATION

CASE NO. 96-02289]

12/15/98: 3/15/96 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; FINED $6,500.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED

VIOLATIONS OF PART V, SECTION 2(D) OF SCHEDULE TO THE ASSOCIATION'S BY-LAWS IN

THAT THE FIRM ENTERED QUOTATIONS INTO THE NASDAQ SYSTEM THAT EXCEEDED THE

PARAMETERS FOR MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SPREADS.***$6,500.00 PAID ON 4/16/96, INVOICE

#96-MS-245***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS950123]hk

12/15/98: 9/25/95 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED

$1,000.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF RULE 11AC1-1C OF THE

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, PART V, SECTION 2B OF SCHEDULE D OF THE

ASSOCIATION'S BY-LAWS AND ARTICLE III, SECTIONS 1 AND 6 OF THE ASSOCIATION'S

RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE BY FAILING TO HONOR THE QUOTATIONS IT CAUSED TO BE

DISSEMINATED THROUGH THE NASDAQ SYSTEM (BACKING AWAY).***$1,000.00 PAID ON

10/19/95 INVOICE #95-MS-661***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS950048]

12/15/98: 6/02/95 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; FINED $2,000.00 FOR VIOLATIONS OF PART 5,

SECTION 2(b) OF SCHEDULE D TO THE ASSOCIATION'S BY-LAWS, AND RULE 11Ac1-1(c)

4

OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1934 IN THAT THE FIRM FAILED TO HONOR THE QUOTATIONS

IT CAUSED TO BE DISSEMINATED THROUGH THE NASDAQ SYSTEM.***$2,000.00 PAID ON

7/18/95, INVOICE #95-MS.409***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS940115]hk

12/15/98: 4/19/94 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $750.00

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGE VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE III, SECTION 1 OF THE RULES

OF FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT HERZOG UPDATED QUOTATIONS IN THE BULLETIN BOARD

SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE ALLOWABLE TIME FOR UPDATING FOREIGN OR ADR SECURITIES ON

THE BULLETIN BOARD.***$750 PAID ON 5/10/94, INVOICE #94-MS-313*** [NASD

COMPLAINT NO. CMS940003]hk

12/15/98: 3/09/94 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; FINED $4,000 FOR VIOLATIONS OF PART V, SECTION

2(d) OF SCHEDULE C FOR ENTERING NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONCERNING EXCESS SPREADS.

[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS930082-AWC]

12/15/98: 1/10/94 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): MISREPRESENTATION. THE

AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$93,800.00; ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$60,000.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD

ARBITRATION CASE NO. 91-01315]

12/15/98: 12/17/93 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; FINED $3,000 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF

PART VI, SECTION 2(d) OF SCHEDULE D FOR ENTERING NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING

EXCESS SPREADS.***$3,000.00 PAID ON 1/27/94 INVOICE #94-MS-24*** [NASD

COMPLAINT NO. CMS930060]hk

12/15/98: 8/26/93 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $500.00

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGES VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE III, SECTION 1 OF THE

5

RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT THE FIRM UPDATED QUOTATIONS IN THE BULLETIN

BOARD SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE ALLOWABLE TIME FOR UPDATING FOREIGN OR ADR SECURITIES

ON THE BULLETIN BOARD.***$500.00 PAID ON 9/14/93 INVOICE #93-MS- 677***[NASD

COMPLAINT NO. CMS930025 AWC]hk



To: Ellen who wrote (37)12/16/1998 6:09:00 PM
From: Ellen  Respond to of 86
 
HRZG - part 2

12/15/98: 7/07/93 NASD FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD INC. WAS FINED $2,000 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF PART

VI, SECTION 2(d) OF SCHEDULE D FOR ENTERING NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING

EXCESS SPREADS.*** $2,000.00 PAID ON 7/27/93 INVOICE #93-12-568***[NASD

COMPLAINT NO. CMS930018]

12/15/98: 4/08/93 NASD FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD INC. WAS FINED $2,000 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF PART

VI SECTION 2(d) OF SCHEDULE D FOR ENTERING NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING EXCESS

SPREADS.*** $2,000.00 PAID ON 4/27/93 INVOICE #93-MS-345***[NASD COMPLAINT NO.

CMS920119]hk

12/15/98: 3/18/93 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $250.00

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE III, SECTION 1 OF THE

RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS UPDATED QUOTATIONS IN THE

BULLETIN BOARD SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE ALLOWABLE TIME FOR UPDATING FOREIGN OR ADR

SECURITIES ON THE BULLETIN BOARD.***$250.00 PAID ON 4/2/93 INVOICE

#93-MS-269***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS930003]hk

12/15/98: 7/21/92 NASD FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD INC. WAS FINED $3,000 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF PART

VI, SECTION 2(d) OF SCHEDULE D FOR ENTERING NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING

EXCESS SPREADS.*** $3,000.00 PAID ON 8/11/92 INVOICE #92-MS-737***[NASD

COMPLAINT NO. CMS920081] hk

12/15/98: 6/03/92 NASD FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD INC. WAS FINED $2,000 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF PART

VI, SECTION 2(d) OF SCHEDULE D FOR ENTERING NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING

6

EXCESS SPREADS.*** $2,000.00 PAID ON 6/22/92 INVOICE #92-MS-580***[NASD

COMPLAINT NO. CMS920059-AWC]hk

12/15/98: 2/21/92 NASD FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, & GEDULD INC. WAS FINED $3,000 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF

PART IV, SECTION 2(D) OF SCHEDULE D. WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE

ALLEGATIONS, THE FIRM CONSENTED TO THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: THE FIRM ENTERED

NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING EXCESS SPREADS.***$3,000.00 PAID ON 3/21/92

INVOICE #92-MS-242***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS910175]hk

12/15/98: 9/30/91 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): ACCOUNT

RELATED-NEGLIGENCE. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT

ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$2,750.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD

ARBITRATION CASE NO. 90-02063]

12/15/98: 7/10/91 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $500.00

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGE VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE III, SECTION 1 AND RULE

15C2-11.***$500.00 PAID ON 8/5/91 INVOICE #91-MS-842***[NASD COMPLAINT NO.

MS-1069-AWC]hk

12/15/98: 5/29/91 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; FINED $2,000 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF

PART VI, SECTION 2(D) OF SCHEDULE D. WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS, THE FIRM CONSENTED TO THE FOLLOWING FINDING: THE FIRM

ENTERED NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING EXCESS SPREADS.***$2,000.00 PAID ON

9/3/91 INVOICE #91-MS-990***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. MC-1094-AWC]hk

12/15/98: 3/28/91 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED

$1,000.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGE VIOLATIONS OF PART VI, SECTION 2D OF

SCHEDULE D FOR ENTERING NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING EXCESS SPREADS.

7

***$1,000.00 PAID ON 5/3/91 INVOICE #91-MS-442***[NASD COMPLAINT NO.

MS-1003-AWC]

12/15/98: 1/09/91 NYSE ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF A NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION

INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

NEGLIGENCE IN THAT THE FIRM FAILED TO DISCLOSE THAT THE PRICE PER CONTRACT WAS

REDUCED ON THE EX-DIVIDEND DATE. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY

DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER $8,756.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER

$8,756.00 PLUS INTEREST FROM 10/20/89 TO THE DATE OF PAYMENT.

12/15/98: 1/09/91 NYSE ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF A NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A

PUBLIC CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): FAILURE TO

EXECUTE ORDER TO TRADE. ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER

$10,000.00, CUSTOMER'S CLAIM IS DISMISSED.

12/15/98: 10/19/90 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

EXECUTIONS-FAILURE TO EXECUTE. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY

DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$11,625.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO

CUSTOMER-$4,625.00. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 89-02639]

12/15/98: 11/20/89 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): EXECUTIONS-FAILURE TO

EXECUTE. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; OTHER COSTS,

AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL.

[NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 88-03710]

12/15/98: 8/10/89 NYSE FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $1,000.00 BY THE NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE

8

FOR FAILING TO PROMPTLY REPORT DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS BY THE AMEX AND NASD.

[NYSE DOCKET/CASE NO. UNSPECIFIED]

12/15/98: 7/20/89 MASSACHUSETTS FINE

OFFER OF SETTLEMENT; FINED $25,000 BY THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS FOR FAILURE

TO COMPLY WITH STATE REQUIREMENTS REGARDING THE TIMELY DISCLOSURE OF

DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS BY SECURITIES SELF REGULATORY ORGANIZATIONS. WITHOUT

ADMITTING OR DENYING THE COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS, THE FIRM CONSENTED TO THE

FOLLOWING FINDINGS: THE FIRM FAILED TO DISCLOSE OVER 25 DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS

TAKEN AGAINST IT BY THE NASD, NYSE AND ASE DURING 1980-1987. THE STATE FURTHER

ORDERED THE FIRM TO ADOPT IMPROVED SUPERVISION AND DISCLOSURE PROCEDURES TO

AVOID FUTURE VIOLATIONS OF THE STATUTE. [DOCKET/CASE NO. E-88-422]

12/15/98: 2/07/89 NYSE FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $1,000.00 BY THE NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE

FOR FAILURE TO SUBMIT AUDIT TRAIL DATA. [NYSE DOCKET/CASE NO. UNSPECIFIED]

12/15/98: 11/21/88 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED

$1,000.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGE VIOLATIONS OF PART VI, SECTION 2D OF

SCHEDULE D FOR ENTERING NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING EXCESS SPREADS. ***$1,000

FINE PAID 10/13/88***[NASD COMPLAINT MS-772-AWC]hk

12/15/98: 9/28/88 AMEX FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $100.00 BY THE AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE

FOR FAILURE TO SUBMIT TRADE DATA IN A TIMELY FASHION. [AMEX DOCKET/CASE NO.

UNSPECIFIED]

12/15/98: 9/13/88 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $1,000

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FIRM VIOLATED PART VI, SECTION 2(d) OF

SCHEDULE D FOR ENTERING NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING EXCESS SPREADS. [NASD

COMPLAINT NO. MS-726] jm

9

12/15/98: 11/24/87 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT. FINED $500.00 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF

PART VI, SECTION 2(d) OF SCHEDULE D. WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS, CONSENTED TO THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: ENTERED NASDAQ

QUOTATIONS CONTAINING EXCESS SPREADS. [COMPLAINT #MS-619-AWC].

12/15/98: 3/16/87 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $500.00

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGE VIOLATIONS OF PART I, SECTION C.3.A OF SCHEDULE D

OF THE ASSOCIATION'S BY-LAWS IN THAT THE FIRM, ON 11/20/86 AND 12/12/86,

ENTERED QUOTATIONS INTO THE NASDAQ SYSTEM THAT WERE NOT REASONABLY RELATED TO

THE PREVAILING MARKET. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. MS-472-AWC]

12/15/98: 12/15/86 NASD SUSPENSION

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS CENSURED,

FINED $50,000.00, AND SUSPENDED AS MARKET MAKER FOR FOR FIVE BUSINESS DAYS BY

THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF SCHEDULE D OF THE ASSOCIATION'S

BY-LAWS IN THAT THE FIRM, ON OR ABOUT 8/22/84 TO ON OR ABOUT 4/10/85, ENTERED

33 FICTITIOUS TRADE REPORTS INTO THE NASDAQ SYSTEM. THE COMPLAINT ALLEGED

VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE III, SECTION 1, 5, 18 AND 27 OF THE ASSOCIATION'S RULES

OF FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT THE FIRM FAILED TO ESTABLISH, MAINTAIN AND REASONABLY

ENFORCE WRITTEN PROCEDURES WHICH WOULD HAVE ENABLED THEM TO PROPERLY SUPERVISE

THE ACTIVITIES OF HHG'S ASSACIATED PERSONS. THE COMPLAINT ALSO ALLEGES

VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE IV, SECTION 5 OF THE RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT THE

FIRM WAS REQUESTED BY THE NASD TO PROVIDE INFORMATION THROUGH THE PRODUCTION

OF DOCUMENTS AND WRITTEN RESPONSES. IN CONNECTION WITH THE NASD'S REQUEST, THE

FIRM, AMONG OTHER THINGS: A) FAILED TO PROVIDE INFORMATION REGARDING A CERTAIN

STOCK IN A TIMELY MANNER REGARDING AN INITIAL 2/7/85 REQUEST; B) FAILED TO

PROVIDE INFORMATION REGARDING CERTAIN STOCKS IN A TIMELY MANNER C) FAILED TO

PROVIDE INFORMATION ON CERTAIN STOCKS REGARDING A 1/9/86 REQUEST. [NASD

COMPLAINT NO. MS-262]

12/15/98: 12/15/86 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

OFFER OF SETTLEMENT; CENSURED, FINED $50,000.00 AND SUSPENDED AS MARKET MAKER

IN CERTAIN SECURITIES FOR A PERIOD OF FIVE BUSINESS DAYS, FOR VIOLATIONS OF

SCHEDULE D OF THE ASSOCIATION'S BY-LAWS; ARTICLE III, SECTIONS 1, 5, 18 AND 27

10

OF THE ASSOCIATION'S RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE; AND ARTICLE IV, SECTION 5 OF THE

ASSOCIATION'S RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE. WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS, CONSENTED TO THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: ACTING THROUGH A

REPRESENTATIVE OF THE FIRM, ENTERED 33 FICTITIOUS TRADE REPORTS INTO THE

NASDAQ SYSTEM; FAILED TO ESTABLISH, MAINTAIN AND REASONABLY ENFORCE WRITTEN

PROCEDURES WHICH WOULD HAVE ENABLED THE FIRM TO PROPERLY SUPERVISE THE

ACTIVITIES OF ASSOCIATED PERSONS TO ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE

SECURITIES LAWS, RULES, REGULATIONS AND STATEMENTS OF POLICY PROMULGATED

THEREUNDER AND WITH THE RULES OF THE ASSOCIATION; AND FAILED TO PROVIDE

INFORMATION REGARDING CERTAIN SPECIFIC TRANSACTIONS IN A TIMELY MANNER.

(MARKET SURVEILLANCE COMMITTEE COMPLAINT #MS-262). \para JUNE 10, 1986 :

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT. CENSURED AND FINED $2,500.00 BY THE NASD FOR

VIOLATIONS OF PART I, SECTION C.3.(a) OF SCHEDULE D OF THE ASSOCIATION'S

BY-LAWS. WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS, CONSENTED TO

THE FOLLOWING: ENTERED QUOTATIONS INTO THE NASDAQ SYSTEM THAT WERE NOT

REASONABLY RELATED TO THE PREVAILING MARKET. [COMPLAINT #MS-264-AWC].

12/15/98: 9/09/86 NYSE FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $1,000.00 BY THE NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE

FOR VIOLATION OF NYSE RULE 132.30. [NYSE DOCKET/CASE NO. UNSPECIFIED]

12/15/98: 4/07/86 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $250.00

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF SECTION 2 OF SCHEDULE G OF THE

ASSOCIATION'S BY-LAWS IN THAT THE FIRM, REPORTED THROUGH THE NASDAQ SYSTEM

FOUR THIRD MARKET RETAIL PRINCIPAL TRANSACTIONS AT PRICES THAT INCLUDED A

MARK-DOWN OR OTHER SALES CHARGE. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. MS-260-AWC]

12/15/98: 1/28/86 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED

$2,000.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF PART I, SECTION C.3.A OF

SCHEDULE D OF THE ASSOCIATION'S BY-LAWS IN THAT THE FIRM ENTERED QUOTATIONS

INTO THE NASDAQ SYSTEM THAT WERE NOT REASONABLY RELATED TO THE PREVAILING

MARKET. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. MS-199-AWC]

12/15/98: 8/02/85 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT. CENSURED AND FINED $6,000.00 BY THE NASD.

11

WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS, CONSENTED TO THE

FOLLOWING FINDINGS: VIOLATIONS OF TRADE REPORTING. [COMPLAINT #MS-132-AWC].

12/15/98: 4/19/85 NASD FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $250.00 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF

"NO VOLUME". [NASD COMPLAINT NO. MS-112-SC]

12/15/98: 4/11/85 NASD FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $1,000.00 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATION OF

EXCESS SPREAD. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. N-EX-23]

12/15/98: 1/11/84 NASD FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULG, INC. WAS FINED $750.00 BY THE NASD FOR EXCESS SPREAD.

[NASD COMPLAINT NO. NSE-150]

12/15/98: 9/27/83 AMEX FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $50.00 BY THE AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE

FOR FAILURE TO SUBMIT TRADE DATA IN A TIMELY FASHION. [AMEX NO. UNSPECIFIED]

12/15/98: 8/03/83 AMEX FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $50.00 BY THE AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE

FOR FAILURE TO SUBMIT TRADE DATA IN A TIMELY FASHION. [AMEX DOCKET/CASE NO.

UNSPECIFIED]

12/15/98: 5/11/83 AMEX FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $50.00 BY THE AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE

FOR FAILURE TO SUBMIT TRADE DATA IN A TIMELY FASHION. [AMEX DOCKET/CASE NO.

UNSPECIFIED]

12/15/98: 5/02/83 NASD FINE

12

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $250.00 BY THE NASD FOR EXCESS SPREAD.

[NASD COMPLAINT NO. UNSPECIFIED]

12/15/98: 10/01/82 NASD FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $250.00 BY THE NASD FOR UNEXCUSED

WITHDRAWAL. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. UNSPECIFIED]

12/15/98: 11/18/81 NASD FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $200.00 BY THE NASD FOR UNEXCUSED

WITHDRAWAL. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. UNSPECIFIED]

12/15/98: 8/03/81 NASD FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $700.00 BY THE NASD FOR EXCESS SPREAD,

UNEXCUSED WITHDRAWAL. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. UNSPECIFIED]

12/15/98: 3/12/81 NASD FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $200.00 BY THE NASD FOR EXCESS SPREAD.

[NSE-105]

12/15/98: 3/03/81 AMEX FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $50.00 BY THE AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE

FOR FAILURE TO SUBMIT OPTION TRADE COMPARISON DATA. [AMEX DOCKET/CASE NO.

UNSPECIFIED]

12/15/98: 1/23/81 NASD FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $100.00 BY THE NASD FOR EXCESS SPREAD.

[NASD COMPLAINT NO. NSE-99]

12/15/98: 11/17/80 NASD FINE

13

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $600.00 BY THE NASD FOR UNEXCUSED

WITHDRAWAL. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. NSW-35]

12/15/98: 11/17/80 NASD FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $700.00 BY THE NASD FOR UNEXCUSED

WITHDRAWAL. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. NSW-36]

12/15/98: 3/13/80 AMEX FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS FINED $100.00 BY THE AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE

FOR FAILURE TO SUBMIT TRADE DATA IN A TIMELY FASHION. [AMEX DOCKET/CASE NO.

UNSPECIFIED]

12/15/98: 2/25/80 AMEX FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEGULD, INC. WAS FINED $50.00 BY THE AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE

FOR FAILURE TO SUBMIT TRADE DATA IN A TIMELY FASHION. [AMEX DOCKET/CASE NO.

UNSPECIFIED]

12/15/98: 1/08/70 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

HERZOG, HEINE, GEDULD, INC. WAS CENSURED AND FINED 250.00 BY THE NASD. [NASD

COMPLAINT NO. NY-SC]

14



To: Ellen who wrote (37)12/16/1998 6:15:00 PM
From: Ellen  Respond to of 86
 
MEMBER FIRM: M. H. MEYERSON & CO., INC.

BD NUMBER: 540

NASD Member Firm: M. H. MEYERSON & CO., INC.

BD Number: 540

12/15/98 SUMMARY INFORMATION

12/15/98: 7/20/98 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; M.H. MEYERSON & CO., INC. WAS CENSURED AND

FINED $12,500 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FOLLOWING VIOLATIONS

OCCURRED: SEPARATE AND DISTINCT VIOLATIONS OF SEC RULE 11Ac1-1 ("SEC FIRM

QUOTE RULE"), NASD CONDUCT RULE 3320 AND NASD MARKETPLACE RULE 4613(b);

VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULES 2110 AND 3010 IN THAT FIRM FAILED TO

ESTABLISH, MAINTAIN, AND ENFORCE WRITTEN SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES REASONABLY

DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE SECURITIES LAWS AND

REGULATIONS CONCERNING FIRM QUOTE COMPLIANCE.[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS980067

AWC]hk

12/15/98: 2/03/98 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): SUITABILITY;

CHURNING; ACCOUNT RELATED - FAILURE TO SUPERVISE. THE AWARD INCLUDED:

ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$26,000.00, AMOUNT

AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$9,950.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; PUNITIVE/EXEMPLARY

DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$50,000.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO

CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY;

ATTORNEY'S FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO

CUSTOMER-$0.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO. 97-01165]

12/15/98: 11/24/97 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; M.H. MEYERSON & CO., INC. WAS CENSURED AND

FINED $24,000 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FOLLOWING VIOLATIONS

OCCURRED: SEPARATE AND DISTINCT VIOLATIONS OF NASD MARKETPLACE RULES 4632(a)

AND 4632(f) IN THAT FIRM FAILED TO IDENTIFY TWO AGGREGATED TRANSACTION REPORTS

IN NASDAQ NATIONAL MARKET SECURITIES; AND FAILED TO DESIGNATE AS LATE TO ACT

ONE TRANSACTION IN A NASDAQ NATIONAL MARKET SECURITY; SEPARATE AND DISTINCT

1

VIOLATIONS OF NASD MARKETPLACE RULES 6620(a) AND 6620(c) IN THAT FIRM REPORTED

TO ACT THE INCORRECT PRICE IN ONE TRANSACTION, AND INCORRECTLY DESIGNATED TWO

TRANSACTIONS AS ".T" TO ACT IN OTC EQUITY SECURITIES; SEPARATE AND DISTINCT

VIOLATIONS OF NASD MARKETPLACE RULES 4642(a), 4642(c) AND 4642(f) IN THAT FIRM

INCORRECTLY DESIGNATED TWO TRANSACTIONS IN NASDAQ SMALLCAP SECURITIES AS ".T"

TO ACT AND FAILED TO IDENTIFY SUCH TRANSACTIONS AS LATE; FAILED TO DESIGNATE

AS LATE THREE TRANSACTIONS IN NASDAQ SMALLCAP SECURITIES; REPORTED THE

INCORRECT SYMBOL INDICATING WHETHER ONE TRANSACTION IN A NASDAQ SMALLCAP

SECURITY WAS A BUY, SELL, OR CROSS; AND INCORRECTLY AGGREGATED INDIVIDUAL

EXECUTIONS OF ORDERS IN A NASDAQ SMALLCAP SECURITY AT THE SAME PRICE, FOR

TRANSACTION REPORTING PURPOSES, INTO A SINGLE TRANSACTION REPORT WHEN ONE

INDIVIDUAL ORDER WAS 10,000 SHARES OR MORE; SEPARATE AND DISTINCT VIOLATIONS

OF NASD MARKETPLACE RULES 6130(b) AND 6130(d) IN THAT FIRM FAILED TO ACCEPT OR

DECLINE TWO TRANSACTIONS IN ELIGIBLE SECURITIES WITHIN TWENTY MINUTES AFTER

EXECUTION; AND FAILED TO REPORT TO ACT THE CONTRA SIDE EXECUTING BROKER IN ONE

TRANSACTION IN AN ELIGLBLE SECURITY; VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULE 2110 AND

IM-2110-2 IN THAT FIRM FAILED TO CONTEMPORANEOUSLY EXECUTE ONE AND PARTIALLY

EXECUTE THREE CUSTOMER LIMIT ORDERS; VIOLATIONS OF SEC RULE 17a-3 AND NASD

CONDUCT RULE 3110 IN THAT FIRM FAILED TO SHOW THE TIME OF ENTRY ON MEMORANDA

OF 65 BROKERAGE ORDERS; VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULES 2110 AND 2320 IN THAT

ON JUNE 17, 1996, FIRM EXECUTED A TRANSACTION IN WHICH IT PURCHASED 35,000

SHARES FROM A CUSTOMER AT A PRICE BELOW THE INSIDE BID. FIRM FAILED TO USE

REASONABLE DILIGENCE TO ASCERTAIN THE BEST INTER-DEALER MARKET FOR ITS

CUSTOMER SO THAT THE RESULTANT PRICE WAS AS FAVORABLE AS POSSIBLE UNDER

PREVAILING MARKET CONDITIONS; FINALLY, VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULES 2110

AND 3010 IN THAT FRIM FAILED TO ESTABLISH, MAINTAIN AND ENFORCE WRITTEN

SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES REASONABLY DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE WITH THE

APPLICABLE SECURITIES LAWS AND REGULATIONS REGARDING TRADE REPORTING, RECORD

KEEPING, AND THE LIMIT ORDER PROTECTION INTERPRETATION. ***$24,000 PAID ON

2/9/98, INVOICE NO. 98-MS-154***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS970055 AWC]hk

12/15/98: 4/23/97 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; M.H. MEYERSON & CO. WAS FINED $3,000.00 BY THE

NASD FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF MARKETPLACE RULE 4613(d) FOR ENTERING

QUOTATIONS IN A NASDAQ NATIONAL MARKET SYSTEM THAT EXCEEDED THE PARAMETERS FOR

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SPREADS.***$3,000.OO PAID ON 5/30/97, INVOICE

#97-MS-418***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS960147 AWC]hk

12/15/98: 7/15/96 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; M.H. MEYERSON & CO., INC. WAS CENSURED AND

FINED $2,000.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF PART V, SECTION

2(d) OF SCHEDULE D TO THE ASSOCIATION'S BY-LAWS IN THAT FIRM ENTERED

QUOTATIONS INTO THE NASDAQ SYSTEM THAT EXCEEDED THE PARAMETERS FOR THE MAXIMUM

2

ALLOWABLE SPREAD.***$2,000.00 PAID ON 8/1/96, INVOICE #96-MS-559***[NASD

COMPLAINT NO. CMS960040 AWC]hk

12/15/98: 6/19/95 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S):

EXECUTIONS-FAILURE TO EXECUTE; UNAUTHORIZED TRADING; SUITABILITY; CHURNING.

THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$380,493.50, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$124,000.00 JOINTLY AND

SEVERALLY; ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$115,087.25,

AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$35,000.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY. [NASD

ARBITRATION CASE NO. 95-02833]

12/15/98: 10/27/94 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION AWARD. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC

CUSTOMER AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): TRADING

DISPUTES-SELL OUTS. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT

ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$734.50, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$367.00; TREBLE

DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$1,469.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$0.00

JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-,

AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER- JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED

BY CUSTOMER-$0.00, AMOUNT AWARDED TO CUSTOMER-$75.00. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE

NO. 94-01479]

12/15/98: 9/29/93 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): MISREPRESENTATION. THE

AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$3,746.50. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD

ARBITRATION CASE NO. 93-01857]

12/15/98: 8/03/93 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): OTHER; BRCH OF FIDUCIARY

DT. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$5,293.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD

ARBITRATION CASE NO. 93-01117]

3

12/15/98: 6/18/93 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; M.H. MEYERSON AND COMPANY, INC. WAS FINED

$250.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT M.H. MEYERSON VIOLATED ARTICLE III,

SECTION 1 OF THE ASSOCIATION'S RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE IN THAT THE FOLLOWING

RESPONDENTS UPDATED QUOTATIONS IN THE BULLETIN BOARD SYSTEM OUTSIDE THE

ALLOWABLE TIME FOR UPDATING FOREIGN OR ADR SECURITIES ON THE BULLETIN BOARD.

***$250.00 PAID ON 7/16/93 INVOICE #93-MS-561***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS930012]

hk

12/15/98: 1/29/93 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; M.H. MEYERSON & CO., INC. WAS FINED $2,000.00

BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF PART VI, SECTION 2(d) OF SCHEDULE

D FOR ENTERING NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING EXCESS SPREADS.***$2,000.00 PAID

ON 2/11/93 INVOICE #93-MS-125***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS920105 AWC] hk

12/15/98: 12/02/92 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): MISREPRESENTATION; UNKNOWN

TYPE OF CONTROVERSY; UNKNOWN TYPE OF CONTROVERSY; UNKNOWN TYPE OF

CONTROVERSY. THE AWARD INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$13,200.75; PUNITIVE/EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$10,000.00; TREBLE DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$39,602.25.

RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION CASE NO.

91-04073]

12/15/98: 7/21/92 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; M.H. MEYERSON AND COMPANY, INC. WAS FINED

$1,000.00 BY THE NASD. THE NASD ALLEGED THAT M.H. MEYERSON VIOLATED PART VI,

SECTION 2(D) OF SCHEDULE D FOR ENTERING NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING EXCESS

SPREADS.***$1,000.00 PAID ON 8/6/92 INVOICE #92-MS-733*** [NASD COMPLAINT NO.

CMS920077 AWC]hk

12/15/98: 7/30/91 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

4

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; CENSURED AND FINED $8,545 FOR VIOLATIONS OF

ARTICLE III, SECTIONS 1 AND 27 OF THE RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE. WITHOUT

ADMITTING OR DENYING THE ALLEGATIONS, THE FIRM CONSENTED TO THE FOLLOWING

FINDINGS: THE FIRM, ACTING THROUGH A CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL FILED TO MAKE A BONA

FIDE PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION OF A COMMON STOCK IN CONNECTION WITH A PUBLIC

OFFERING; IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE BOARD OF GOVENORS' FREE-RIDING AND

WITHHOLDING INTERPRETATION, THE FIRM, ACTING THROUGH THE SAID INDIVIDUAL SOLD

SHARES OF A CERTAIN STOCK THAT TRADED AT A PREMIMUM IN THE IMMEDIATE AFTER

MARKET TO RESTRICTED PERSONS; AND FAILED TO ENFORCE ITS WRITTEN SUPERVISORY

PROCEDURES.***$8,545.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY PAID ON 8/20/91 INVOICE

#91-10-969***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. C10910108]hk

12/15/98: 3/28/90 NASD ARBITRATION

SUBJECT OF AN NASD ARBITRATION. THE ARBITRATION INVOLVED A PUBLIC CUSTOMER

AND WAS FILED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING DISPUTE(S): SUITABILITY. THE AWARD

INCLUDED: ACTUAL/COMPENSATORY DAMAGES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$17,615.00;

ATTORNEY'S FEES, AMOUNT ASKED BY CUSTOMER-$0.00; OTHER COSTS, AMOUNT ASKED BY

CUSTOMER-$0.00. RELIEF REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED IN FULL. [NASD ARBITRATION

CASE NO. 89-01474]

12/15/98: 10/12/89 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; FINED $2,500 BY THE NASD FOR VIOLATIONS OF

ARTICLE III, SECTION 1 OF THE RULES OF FAIR PRACTICE. WITHOUT ADMITTING OR

DENYING THE COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS, THE FIRM CONSENTED TO THE FOLLOWING

FINDINGS: DURING THE PERIOD JANUARY 20, 1989 THROUGH MARCH 1989, THE FIRM

EXECUTED FOURTEEN (14) SHORT SALE TRANSACTIONS FOR THE SAME CUSTOMER IN THE

SAME SECURITY WITHOUT MAKING THE AFFIRMATIVE DETERMINATION PRIOR TO EACH

TRANSACTION THAT THE STOCK COULD BE BORROWED AS REQUIRED BY THE BOARD OF

GOVERNORS' INTERPRETATION WITH RESPECT TO "PROMPT RECEIPT AND DELIVERY OF

SECURITIES".***$2,500.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY PAID ON 12/18/89 INVOICE

#89-MS-878***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. MS-831-AWC]hk

12/15/98: 8/24/88 VIRGINIA ORDER OF INJUNCTION

THE FIRM ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DIVISION

OF SECURITIES AND RETAIL FRANCHISING, IN WHICH IT AGREED TO TENDER $2,000.00

TO THE COMMONWEALTH AND AGREED TO BE ENJOINED FROM ANY FURTHER VIOLATIONS. IT

ALSO AGREED TO MAKE AN OFFER OF RECISSION TO A VIRGINIA INVESTOR. THE FIRM

ENTERED INTO THE AGREEMENT WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE FOLLOWING

ALLEGATIONS: THE FIRM, THROUGH ONE OF ITS AGENTS, OFFERED AND SOLD SECURITIES

IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA TO SAID VIRGINIA INVESTOR WITHOUT THE

5

SECURITIES BEING REGISTERED UNDER THE VIRGINIA SECURITIES ACT, AND FAILED TO

DILIGENTLY SUPERVISE ITS AGENT. [DOCKET/CASE #SEC880063]

12/15/98: 1/07/85 MISSOURI SUSPENSION

CONSENT ORDER; THE FIRM'S BROKER/DEALER REGISTRATION WAS SUSPENDED AND THE

FIRM WAS PROHIBITED FROM ENGAGING IN THE OFFER, SALE OR PURCHASE OF SECURITIES

IN THE STATE OF MISSOURI FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR COMMENCING ON 10/22/84 FOR

ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE MISSOURI UNIFORM SECURITIES ACT SS 409.204(D) AND

(G). AT ANY TIME SUBSEQUENT TO 10/22/85, UPON PRESENTATION OF AN AFFADAVIT

STATING THAT THE COMPANY HAS NOT VIOLATED ANY TERM OF CONDITION OF THAT

AGREEMENT, THE BROKER-DEALER REGISTRATION OF THE COMPANY WILL BECOME EFFECTIVE

WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS TO THE FACTS ARISING OUT OF THE COMPLAINT FILED IN THE

ABOVE-STYLED CASE BEFORE THE MISSOURI ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING COMMISSION. THE

FIRM CONSENTED TO THE SANCTIONS WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE STATE'S

ALLEGATIONS.[MO DOCKET/CASE NO. NOT PROVIDED]hk

12/15/98: 2/15/84 SEC ORDER OF PERMANENT INJUNCTION

CONSENT ORDER; PERMANENTLY ENJOINED BY THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, BASED ON A CIVIL COMPLAINT FILED BY THE

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, FROM VIOLATIONS OF THE ANTIFRAUD

PROVISIONS OF THE SECURITIES LAWS, AND SECTION 17(A) OF THE EXCHANGE ACT. THE

FIRM ALSO AGREED TO TAKE SUBSTANTIAL STEPS TO ENSURE ALL PURCHASERS OF A

CERTAIN STOCK WERE MADE WHOLE. THE COURT FOUND THAT THE FIRM HAD ENTERED INTO

A SCHEME AND ARTIFICE TO DEFRAUD AND TO CONTROL AND MANIPULATE THE MARKET

PRICE OF THE STOCK OF A NEWLY FORMED COMPANY; DESTROYED RECORDS OF THE

BROKERAGE FIRM REQUIRED TO BE MAINTAINED FOR A PERIOD OF SIX YEARS UNDER THE

PRETEXT THAT A FIRE IN THE STORAGE FACILITY DESTROYED THE RECORDS WHEN IN FACT

MANY OF THE FIRM'S RECORDS WERE NOT DAMAGED BY WATER OR FIRE; AND AIDED AND

ABETTED VIOLATIONS OF THE ANTIFRAUD PROVISIONS BY OTHER DEFENDANTS IN THIS

ACTION. THE FIRM CONSENTED TO THE FINDINGS AND ORDER OF PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE COMMISSION'S ALLEGATIONS. [CIVIL ACTION NO.

78 Civ. 893 (MJL)]

12/15/98: 9/09/74 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

M.H. MEYERSON & CO., INC. WAS CENSURED AND FINED $500.00 JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY

BY THE NASD. THE COMPLAINT WAS FILED ON 9/9/74 AND BECAME FINAL ON

9/9/74***FINES AND COSTS PAID 10/30/74*** [NASD COMPLAINT NO. AWC-173]hk

12/15/98: 9/20/73 NASD FINE

6

M.H. MERERSON AND COMPANY, INC. WAS THE SUBJECT OF A FINE BY THE NASD. [NASD

COMPLAINT NO. AWC-48]

12/15/98: 2/26/71 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

M.H. MEYERSON AND COMPANY WAS CENSURED AND FINED $10,000.00 BY THE NASD. *****

ON 4/03/70, THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS CALLED COMPLAINT FOR REVIEW. THE DBCC

STAYED THE DECISION. THE BOARD OF GOVENORS DECISION 1/27/71 WHEREIN THE

FINDINGS MADE BY DBCC ARE AFFIRMED, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF FREE-RIDING AND

WITHHOLDINGS VIOLATIONS, WHICH IS REVERSED AND THE PENALTY IMPOSED IS REDUCED.

M.H. MEYERSON IS CENSURED AND FINED $1,000.00.

**** COMPLAINT FINAL 2/26/71. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. NY-1194]

12/15/98: 7/11/63 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

M.H. MEYERSON AND COMPANY WAS CENSURED AND FINED $900.00 BY THE NASD. ****

COMPLAINT APPEALED TO BOARD OF GOVERNORS ON 12/02/62. DBCC DECISION IS STAYED.

***** 7/11/63 B/G AFFIRMED FINDINGS OF DBCC. [NASD COMPLAINT NO. NY-566]

7



To: Ellen who wrote (37)12/16/1998 6:17:00 PM
From: Ellen  Respond to of 86
 
MEMBER FIRM: NORTH AMERICAN INSTITUTIONAL BROKERS

BD NUMBER: 20574

NASD Member Firm: NORTH AMERICAN INSTITUTIONAL BROKERS

BD Number: 20574

12/15/98 SUMMARY INFORMATION

12/15/98: 4/27/98 NASD CENSURE AND FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; CENSURED AND FINED $8,500 BY THE NASD. THE

NASD ALLEGED THAT THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITY OCCURRED: FIRM FAILED TO DESIGNATE AS

LATE TO ACT ONE TRANSACTION; FAILED TO REPORT THE CORRECT TIME OF EXECUTION TO

ACT IN ONE TRANSACTION; FAILED TO PROVIDE ON FORM T THE TIME OF EXECUTION FOR

FOUR TRANSACTIONS; FAILED TO PROVIDE ON FORM T A SYMBOL INDICATING WHETHER

FIVE TRANSACTIONS WERE A BUY, SELL, OR CROSS; AND FAILED TO PROVIDE ON FORM T

THAT TWO TRANSACTIONS WERE CANCELLED IN VIOLATION OF NASD MARKETPLACE RULES

4632(a), 4632(a)(5), AND 4632(c). FIRM FAILED TO DESIGNATE AS LATE TO ACT TWO

TRANSACTIONS; FAILED TO REPORT TO ACT ONE TRANSACTION; FAILED TO PROVIDE ON

FORM T THE TIME OF EXECUTION FOR TWO TRANSACTIONS; FAILED TO PROVIDE ON FORM T

A SYMBOL INDICATING WHETHER TWO TRANSACTIONS WERE A BUY, SELL, OR CROSS; AND

FAILED TO PROVIDE ON FORM T THAT ONE TRANSACTION WAS CANCELLED IN VIOLATION OF

NASD MARKETPLACE RULE 4642(a) AND 4642(a)(5). FIRM FAILED TO DESIGNATE AS LATE

TO ACT FOUR TRANSACTIONS; FAILED TO REPORT TO ACT TWO TRANSACTIONS; AND FAILED

TO PROVIDE ON A FORM T THE TIME OF EXECUTION FOR ONE TRANSACTION. THIS CONDUCT

INVOLVING OTC EQUITY SECURITIES CONSTITUTES SEPARATE AND DISTINCT VIOLATIONS

OF NASD MARKETPLACE RULES 6620, 6620(a) AND 6620(a)(4). FIRM FAILED TO

PRESERVE, FOR A PERIOD OF NOT LESS THAN SIX YEARS, MEMORANDA OF ONE BROKERAGE

ORDER; FAILED TO SHOW TERMS AND CONDITIONS ON MEMORANDA OF EIGHT BROKERAGE

ORDERS; FAILED TO SHOW ON A MEMORANDA OF ONE BROKERAGE ORDER THE CORRECT TIME

OF ENTRY; AND FAILED TO SHOW ON MEMORANDA OF TWO BROKERAGE OREDRS THE CORRECT

TIME OF EXECUTION IN VIOLATION OF NASD CONDUCT RULES 3110 AND 3110(a). IN

ADDITION, FIRM FAILED TO ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN ADEQUATE WRITTEN SUPERVISORY

PROCEDURES REASONABLY DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE

SECURITIES LAWS AND REGULATIONS REGARDING TRADE REPORTING, BEST EXECUTION,

RECORD KEEPING, AND THE LIMIT ORDER PROTECTION INTERPRETATION IN VIOLATION OF

NASD CONDUCT RULES 2110 AND 3010.***$8,500.00 PAID ON 6/18/98, INVOICE

#98-MS-484***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS980044 AWC]hk

12/15/98: 2/23/93 NASD FINE

ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER AND CONSENT; NORTH AMERICAN INSTITUTIONAL BROKERS WAS FINED

$1,000 BY THE NASD FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF PART VI SECTION 2(d) OF SCHEDULE

1

D FOR ENTERING NASDAQ QUOTATIONS CONTAINING EXCESS SPREADS. ***$1,000 PAID ON

3/11/93 INVOICE #93-MS-168***[NASD COMPLAINT NO. CMS920106 (AWC) (A)]hk

2



To: Ellen who wrote (37)12/16/1998 6:19:00 PM
From: Ellen  Respond to of 86
 
MEMBER FIRM: SHARPE CAPITAL, INC.

BD NUMBER: 18452

NASD Member Firm: SHARPE CAPITAL, INC.

BD Number: 18452

12/15/98 SUMMARY INFORMATION

12/15/98: 6/28/96 MARYLAND ORDER

THE MARYLAND DIVISION OF SECURITIES ACCEPTED A CONSENT ORDER AND ORDERED FIRM

TO RETURN THE SUM OF $1,625.00 IN COMMISSIONS TO THE ISSUER BY WHICH FIRM WAS

PAID FOR THE MARYLAND TRANSACTIONS. THE DIVISION ALLEGED THAT BASED UPON

INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY FIRM, SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS WERE EFFECTED PRIOR TO

ITS BROKER-DEALER REGISTRATION BEING APPROVED IN MARYLAND. [MD DOCKET/CASE NO.

BD-96-0182]

1



To: Ellen who wrote (37)12/16/1998 6:21:00 PM
From: Ellen  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 86
 
MEMBER FIRM: SPENCER EDWARDS, INC.

BD NUMBER: 22067

NASD Member Firm: SPENCER EDWARDS, INC.

BD Number: 22067

12/15/98 SUMMARY INFORMATION

12/15/98: 4/04/94 ALABAMA DENIAL OF REGISTRATION ORDER

THE FIRM'S REGISTRATION WAS DENIED IN THE STATE OF ALABAMA. THE STATE ALLEGED

THAT THE FIRM FAILED TO ADEQUATELY RESPOND TO APPLICATION DEFICIENCIES.

12/15/98: 3/11/94 VACATED FLORIDA ACTION

THE FIRM WAS THE SUBJECT OF A VACATED FLORIDA ACTION. [FL DOCKET/CASE NO.

93.385.DOS]

1